Interesting People mailing list archives
more on Google to Offer News Archive
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 11:30:36 -0700
Begin forwarded message: From: "RJR RJRiley.com" <RJR () RJRILEY com> Date: September 9, 2006 7:23:34 AM PDT To: dave () farber net Cc: sally () sallyrichards com Subject: RE: [IP] more on Google to Offer News Archive Dave, for IP if you wish.Sally, you said "Writers currently have to prove damages, and with no way
to audit microsales, how many times something has been accessed, for howmuch $$ and if it is originally what brought a surfer to the site (if so, what other purchases were made on that visit), damages cannot be physically
proven."I am not an attorney, but I am an independent inventor and we face the same problems. I wish that patent holders had the same robust protections which
copyright owners have. Below are my understanding of the legal issue, I urge you to confirm this with an attorney. 1) There are already statutory damages for copyright violation. Up to $150,000 for each occurrence.2) The information you are seeking to determine the extent of damages should
be discoverable. Try this link for some insight into the law:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/ usc_sec_17_00000504----000-.
htmlI was under the impression that freelance writers have trade associations. You should be trying to get an association to put a case together and take
that case to a contingency litigator. Inventors and authors face the same dilemma when dealing with smallertakings of their property, and that is that litigation is not economical.
But when there is a deep pocked infringer in the supply chain it is economical.Google's use is commercial and they are profiting handsomely from such use, Archive.org is not commercial and really serves a public interest. I don't
think you should lump them together.Archive.org is not content searchable. What it does do is allow a user to recover material which has been removed and to see the history of the sites
evolution. The way that Archive.org is structured right now makes it difficult to use it to acquire copyrighted material. There is no profit motive and it serves the public interest. Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir. Ronald J Riley, PresidentInventorEd, Inc. Professional Inventors Alliance
www.InventorEd.org www.PIAUSA.org RJR"at"InvEd.org RJR"at"PIAUSA.org Change "at" to @ Change "at" to @ RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595 -----Original Message----- From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net] Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 9:30 AM To: ip () v2 listbox com Subject: [IP] more on Google to Offer News Archive Begin forwarded message: From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com> Date: September 7, 2006 8:31:53 AM PDT To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] re: Google to Offer News Archive Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com [Note: This comment comes from reader Sally Richards. DLH] From: "sally" <sally () sallyrichards com> Date: September 6, 2006 11:27:01 PM PDT To: dewayne () warpspeed com Subject: Re: [Dewayne-Net] Google to Offer News Archive I hope Google and its partners in this venture remember the terms theypurchased the stories under. Many freelance pieces "published years ago,"
did not include Internet rights under standard contracts. any of thosestories were pre-commercial Internet. And many of those contracts have long
since disappeared with time. Many of those contracts included First North American Rights. I have toremind publishers many times over that they did not purchase all- inclusive rights when I do vanity searches and find my articles on the Internet that were purchased under First North American Rights. My guess is that a lot of freelancers will have to go into the business of being their own police and
lawyer when this new business model for Google comes about.You know, whenever Kinko's makes a print of a photograph, they ask you to
sign a release notifying you of copyright laws and stating that youpersonally own the rights to the photographs they are reproducing. Perhaps it's time to start holding Google responsible for its content.... And to put a Can-spam law http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/ canspam.htm into place where there's a flat $11,000 fee in place when a company is found in violation of the law (although, I'd like to see how many times that law has
been implemented).Even if Google agrees to take the content off the site, you have sites like
the Wayback Machine http://www.archive.org/index.php that will keep that content up forever. In the end, it's usually the people who create thecontent who make the least, and the companies that don't give a damn about
rights (or say, "Who cares, sue me,") that end up profiting the most.The only way that's going to end is if there is some kind of law protecting
content creators from companies that violate rights contracts. Writerscurrently have to prove damages, and with no way to audit microsales, how
many times something has been accessed, for how much $$ and if it isoriginally what brought a surfer to the site (if so, what other purchases
were made on that visit), damages cannot be physically proven. Sal Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com> ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as rjr () RJRiley com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ipArchives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- people/
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on Google to Offer News Archive David Farber (Sep 09)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on Google to Offer News Archive David Farber (Sep 11)